Future of Formex

There has been a lot of controversy regarding Formex recently and where the MCPE group is located on the molecule. The original nomenclature was correct and since both formestane and 4-OH test differ only in the 17 position being an alcohol or ketone, putting the group here makes it structurally similar to both of these compounds. With that being said IBE has decided to discontinue Formex just in case the laws on derivatives are swayed one way as opposed to another. It is all up to interpretation and the last thing we want is one product causing an issue for the rest. This is not a recall, we just feel that with the recent tension in the PH market and the length of time Formex has already been available that it is best we move on to bigger and better things. The compound has also been increasingly difficult to find and we do not want to add to backorders. We are looking to move to a transdermal formestane considering it is already mass produced.

This is one of the problems with innovation in the supplement market. Not only does innovation cost more money and make things harder to find but it makes it difficult to defend based on the current structure of the DSHEA. I hope you understand and we appreciate your continued business.

Takes ~5x as much to get similar plasma concentrations, hence the fact we went with the oral formex route. But it doesn't matter what "we" want, it is about what customers want and we have had a massive influx of people saying they want transdermal.

There is a reason that there are HUNDREDS of drugs on the market and not 1 drug for each condition. It doesn't matter if one is better than the other, it is about who is used to prescribing what, patients demanding drugs they saw on commercials, and drug reps offering samples. My point is we supply what people are asking for and this is one of them.

It seems that LakeMountD is now saying that the original nomenclature WAS CORRECT=MCPE at the 17th position, and thus--at least potentially--illegal; however, this was right after IBE was quoted in the "Formex Lab Test" thread as saying that the original nomenclature was WRONG and the employee how created the original write-up got "reamed" for this mistake! Also, that their toxicologist "chuckled" when he heard about this mistake and assured them that he would have told them if the MCPE was at the 17th position, as this would have been "trouble" for them!

Yes, I do find it strange that COAs for Epistane have been around, but I can't get LakemountD to provide one for Formex nor clear up which of ther conflicting stories concerning this product is correct--the MCPE was or was not ever at the 4th position? The original nomenclature was or was not correct?

Is it true about the MCPE being the 4th position D? So from what I have read, the current batch is either A) Illegal, or B)Unbioavailable. Which is it?

The MCPE is at the 17th position. The way it was written originally is completely correct and always has been. The owners freaked out really early in the morning (or late at night if you prefer) and thought it was wrong when they read a PM from someone. This was before they spoke with me. The tests confirm our originals and the nomenclature. The problem with formex is that since there is only a difference between formestane and 4-OHT at the 17 position, adding an ether technically makes it a derivative of both, leaving it up to interpretation.

EDIT (to answer post above): It is because I never get on the forums anymore and half the time I do not know this stuff is going on. I have a lot of work to do and there are a lot of forums. I am addressing it now. I know my chemistry and the structure was written correctly. Confirm it with NattyD he is a chemist as well.

Yes, it is safe to take. In fact having using an ether as opposed to a methyl decreases toxicity and is just as effective as 17a-methyls at protecting from degradation. Since it is derivatives of both, however, it is just better that we move on now instead of later. Again, this is why innovation is hard, we come out with a better formestane that gets rid of the need for a transdermal, we make it less toxic than a 17a methyl compound, and make it better absorbed and end up being forced to stop selling it to be safe.

Yes, it is safe to take. In fact having using an ether as opposed to a methyl decreases toxicity and is just as effective as 17a-methyls at protecting from degradation. Since it is derivatives of both, however, it is just better that we move on now instead of later. Again, this is why innovation is hard, we come out with a better formestane that gets rid of the need for a transdermal, we make it less toxic than a 17a methyl compound, and make it better absorbed and end up being forced to stop selling it to be safe.

but can it become a suppressive compound??
I ask cause people(me included) runs it on pct, and man that freaks me out

not to rub it in roadblock but i just started another run of formex along with dermacrine and 11-sterone. getting hard for the summer. ill check the dates on my bottles and if i think i cant run them out before then ill hook you up

not to rub it in roadblock but i just started another run of formex along with dermacrine and 11-sterone. getting hard for the summer. ill check the dates on my bottles and if i think i cant run them out before then ill hook you up

wow.... complete suckage... Formex came and went while i was away n now i wont even get to try it.... I love high dose(probably even suppressive) transdermal form.... woulda loved to been in action to run this at the time.

wow.... complete suckage... Formex came and went while i was away n now i wont even get to try it.... I love high dose(probably even suppressive) transdermal form.... woulda loved to been in action to run this at the time.